I would much rather contribute to a project with a CLA and the possibility to be commercially licensed by the entity driving the work on the project. I'm not that interested in working for Amazon for free...
You can't have it both ways. You either believe in, and enthusiastically participate in the development of free software (the philosophy of which requires freedoms to be available on an equitable basis), or you don't.
I am not an ideologue (and I frankly struggle to understand why people find it appealing to be ideologues).
I just want there to be a lot of software made that is useful to me. Software is far more useful to me if I can read and modify its source code.
So my metric is just whether I think something will incentivize people to make more or less of that kind of software. I worry that people will make less and less software that runs as a service in this fashion, as it n becomes more and more obvious that the benefits of that software flow to giant integrated cloud platform providers rather than to the people who make the software.
Being a chump is not motivating, and I think that's the current incentive structure. So I like seeing people try different structures that seem to me like they structure the incentives better.
But you're totally right, philosophy has nothing to do with it for me.
> ... as it n becomes more and more obvious that the benefits of that software flow to giant integrated cloud platform providers rather than to the people who make the software.
The whole point of open source is that everybody has the opportunity to contribute to the benefit of everybody. You don't get to say "oh, but nazis / Amazon / rapists don't get to use this because I disagree with their morals".
The incentive to contribute comes from being part of a community that gets to experience better quality software. For many (me included), that's plenty. I really don't care what Amazon does - I'm neither a customer, nor an investor.
